Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 5:36
And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was [taken] out of the new agreeth not with the old.
36. a piece of a new garment upon an old ] Rather, no one rending a patch from a new garment putteth it upon an old garment. The word ‘rending’ though omitted in our version is found in , A, B, D, L. Our Lord delighted in using these homely metaphors which brought the truth within the comprehension of his humblest hearers. St Matthew (Mat 9:16) has ‘a patch of unteazled cloth.’
both the new maketh a rent ] Rather, with the best uncials, he will both rend the new. The inferior readings adopted by the E. V. make us lose sight of the fact that there is a treble mischief implied, namely, (1) the rending of the new to patch the old; (2) the incongruity of the mixture; (3) the increase of the rent of the old. The latter is mentioned only by St Matthew, but is implied by the bursten skins of the next similitude. Our Lord is referring to the proposal to enforce the ascetic leanings of the forerunner, and the Pharisaic regulations which had become a parasitic growth on the old dispensation, upon the glad simplicity of the new dispensation. To act thus, was much the same thing as using the Gospel by way of a mere adjunct to a mere purple patch upon the old garment of the Law. The teaching of Christ was a new and seamless robe which would only be spoilt by being rent. It was impossible to tear a few doctrines and precepts from Christianity, and use them as ornaments and improvements of Mosaism. If this were attempted (1) the Gospel would be maimed by the rending from its entirety; (2) the contrast between the new and the old system would be made more glaring; (3) the decay of the evanescent institutions would only be violently accelerated. Notice how distinctly these comparisons imply the ultimate abrogation of the Law.
agreeth not ] Rather, will not agree ( sumphonesei).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And he spake also a parable unto them,…. The Scribes and Pharisees; illustrating what he had just now said:
no man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; by “a piece of a new garment” meaning the new and upstart notions and traditions of the elders, which were so in comparison of the law of Moses; and by the “old”, the robe of their own righteousness, wrought out in obedience to the moral and ceremonial law: and Christ suggests, that to join these together, in order to patch up a garment of righteousness, to appear in before God, was equally as weak and ridiculous, as to put a piece of new and undressed cloth into a garment that was old, and wore threadbare.
If otherwise, then both the new, maketh the rent; that is, much worse than it was, as it is expressed both in Matthew and Mark; the old and new cloth being unsuitable, and not of equal strength to hold together: by this Christ intimates, that the Jews, by being directed to the observance of the traditions of the elders, were drawn off from a regard to the commandments of God; so that instead of having a better righteousness, they had one much the worse, a ragged, and a rent one.
And the piece that was taken out of the new, agreeth not with the old; and so the statutes of men, and the ordinances of God, or the traditions of the elders, and the commands of God, are no more like one another, than the piece of a new and an old garment, and as unlike is obedience to the one, and to the other;
[See comments on Mt 9:16].
[See comments on Mt 9:17].
[See comments on Mr 2:21].
[See comments on Mr 2:22] where this, and the following parable, are more largely explained.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Also a parable ( ). There are three parables here in the answer of Jesus (the bridegroom, the patch on the garment, the wineskin). They are not called parables save here, but they are parables and Luke’s language means that.
Rendeth (). This in Luke alone. Common verb. Used of splitting rocks (Mt 27:51). Our word schism comes from it.
Putteth it (). So Mt 9:16 when Mr 2:21 has (sews on). The word for “piece” or “patch” () in all the three Gospels is from the verb , to clap on, and is in Plutarch, Arrian, LXX, though the verb is as old as Homer. See on Matthew and Mark for distinction between (fresh), (new), and (old).
He will rend the new ( ). Future active indicative. So the best MSS.
Will not agree ( ). Future active indicative. So the best manuscripts again.
With the old ( ). Associative instrumental case. Instead of this phrase in Luke, Mark 2:21; Matt 9:16 have “a worse rent” ( ).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
A parable. “From a garment and from wine, especially appropriate at a banquet” (Bengel).
Putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old [ ] . The best texts, however, insert scisav, having rent, which directly governs ejpiblhma, piece; so that the rendering is, No man having rent a piece from a new garment, putteth it, etc. So Rev., No man rendeth a piece and putteth. Both Matthew and Mark have cloth instead of garment, by the use of which latter term “the incongruity of the proceeding comes more strongly into prominence” (Meyer). jEpiblhma, a piece, is literally, a patch, from ejpi, upon, and ballw, to throw : something clapped on. Compare the kindred verb here, ejpiballei, putteth upon.
The new maketh a rent [ ] . The best texts read scisei, will rend, governing the new instead of being used intransitively. Render, as Rev., He will rend the new.
Agreeth not [ ] . The best texts read sumfwnhsei, the future; will not agree. So Rev.
In Matthew and Mark there is only a single damage, that, namely, to the old garment, the rent in which is enlarged. In Luke the damage is twofold; first, in injuring thenew garment by cutting out a piece; and second, in making the old garment appear patched, instead of widening the rent, as in Matthew and Mark.
Bottles [] . Rev., wine skins. See on Mt 9:17.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
THE GARMENT AND BOTTLES PARABLE V. 36-39
1) “And he spake also a parable unto them,” (elegen de kai parabole pros autous) “Then he also related a parable to them,” one among many as by parables He used the “known” and the “familiar” to help people understand the “unknown and unfamiliar”.
2) “No man putteth a piece of new garment upon an old;” (hoti oudeis epiblema apo humatiou kainou schisas epiballei epi himation palaion) “No one puts a patch from a new garment on an old garment, does he?” Mat 9:16.
3) “If, otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent,” (ei de me ge kai to kainon schisei) “Otherwise both the new will tear,” Mar 2:21. It causes a grotesque appearance.
4) “And the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.” (kai to palaio ou sumphonesei to epiblema to apo tou kainou) “And the new patch will not agree (synchronize) with the old garment, will it?” Mat 9:16; Mar 2:21.
The idea is that a patch of new cloth, unshrunken cloth, sewed to cover or fill a hole in an old garment will shrink, when wet or washed, and make a yet worse tear in the old garment.
In like manner the doctrines and program of worship and service of Jesus was a new order – not to be sewn on to, or to patch up Judaism. His work and house of worship (program of service and worship in the church) was better then that of Moses, Heb 3:1-6.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(36) And he spake also a parable unto them.The illustration that follows is common to all three reports, but St. Luke only describes it as a parable, the others apparently confining that term to something that took the form of an actual narrative.
No man putteth.The better MSS. give, No man having rent a piece from a new garment putteth it upon an old. The form which the illustration thus assumes gives it obviously a greater vividness. What folly could be greater than the act described?
Both the new maketh a rent.Better, as agreeing with the reading just given, he will both rend the new, and the patch from the new will not agree with the old.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘And he spoke also a parable to them, “No man tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment, or else he will tear the new, and also the piece from the new will not agree with the old.”
Jesus is here declaring that He has brought something new which must not be spoiled by mingling it with the old. He is bringing the new clothing of the Kingly Rule of God.
In context the application of it is against fasting. It is saying that we should not take old ideas, (in context the ideas about fasting), and apply them to a new situation, or try to fit the new into the old. That would be like cutting a piece from a new garment so as to mend the old. That would be ridiculous. Both garments would be spoiled. To put together the ideas of the old ways and the new would be incompatible. They do not match. With Jesus everything has begun anew.
This suggests that He saw fasting as being mainly for the old dispensation, but not for the new. The old world fasted because they waited in penitence for God to act. But now God was acting and fasting was a thing of the past. Now was the time for rejoicing.
However, the words also contain within them the general idea that what Jesus Himself has come to bring is new. ‘The Kingly Rule of God has drawn near’. So now is to be a time of rejoicing and everything must be looked at in its light. The old had past, and the new has come (compare 2Co 5:17). Two examples of this appear in the Old Testament. The first is in Ezekiel 16 where Israel, having been splendidly clothed by God is defiled because of her idolatrous practises. But God promises hat in the end He will put all right. The second is in Zec 4:3-5 where Joshua the High Priest, the representative of Israel, is clothed in new clothing as an illustration of acceptance by God. From these we may gather that Jesus has come to reclothe His people with pure clothing (compare Mat 22:11-12; Rev 19:8).
The extraordinary significance of this statement must not be overlooked. Jesus had clearly declared that in His coming as the Bridegroom a whole new way of thinking and living had been introduced. He was the introducer of a new age. It was the acceptable year of the Lord. Repentance and forgiveness in the new age into which they were now entering would lead to lives of joy with first the earthly and then the heavenly (risen) Bridegroom. Thus fasting will be unnecessary except in exceptional circumstances, in the brief period before final victory. Everything is different and old ways must be forgotten.
And this is because Jesus is introducing new clothing. This gains new meaning in the light of Jesus’ idea elsewhere, which He Himself may have had in mind, for the man who seeks to enter the heavenly wedding without having a proper wedding garment on will be cast out (Mat 22:11-12 compare Rev 19:8; Rev 3:5; Rev 3:18). Those who would enter His presence must be clothed in His righteousness alone. There must be no partially patched up dress for them.
It will be noted that the illustration here is different from that in Mark. Jesus probably used the same illustration a number of times, varying it slightly when He wanted to make a different point. Mark has clearly used one example, and Luke another. The one Luke has chosen has the advantage to him that, secondarily to its main meaning, it brings out that there is no point in trying to turn Gentiles into Jews.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Proverbial sayings:
v. 36. And He spake also a parable unto them: No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the. new agreeth not with the old.
v. 37. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
v. 38. But new wine must be put into new bottles, and both are preserved.
v. 39. No man also, having drunk old wine, straightway desireth new; for he saith, The old is better. Here are three parabolic or proverbial sayings by which the Lord intends to teach the Pharisees a much-needed lesson. It is foolish to take a patch of a new dress and attempt to make it hold a rent in an old dress. This effort only makes matters worse; for the new cloth, in shrinking, and in accommodating itself to the fit of the dress, draws the threads of the rotten, weak part of the garment, and the matter is made far worse. Besides, the new patch, with its clear colors, stands out too prominently from the old dress, making the patch all the more conspicuous. To put new wine, that has not yet stopped fermenting, into old skins, that have lost the power to stretch, is equally foolish, since the new wine will only tear the bottles. Therefore the new wine is properly put only into new bottles, or skins. The old dress is the righteousness of works, in which the Pharisees believed, the new patch the free grace of Jesus. The piety and self-righteousness of the Pharisees and the doctrine which Jesus proclaimed, the doctrine of the free grace of God in the Savior, do not agree and will never fit in the same person’s life and behavior. If anyone trusts in his own works, and then intends to put a patch of the Gospel upon this self-righteousness, or wants to cover the one or the other transgression with the work and merit of Christ, he will soon find out that this comfort is not reliable. Such a person in the depths of his heart still trusts in his own merit and will be condemned with this unstable comfort. And the new wine is the sweet Gospel of the forgiveness of sins, of the grace of God. This glorious news does not fit into carnal, Pharisaic hearts; if the Gospel is preached to such as still depend upon their own works, it is wasted, for they cannot and will not understand it rightly and receive no benefit from the Gospel. The Gospel requires all hearts to deny all their own righteousness and believe simply in the merits of Jesus the Savior. And finally: A man that has drunk old wine knows its richness and mellowness and therefore does not desire to change for the new, which may be sharper, less agreeable. So dearly did the Pharisees and the disciples of John love their old, accustomed ways that they did not want to change, although the offering of the new doctrine of the Gospel was salvation full and free.
Summary. Jesus causes the miraculous draught of fishes, calls Simon and his companions, heals a leper, cures a paralytic, calls Levi, and defends Himself and His disciples against Jewish attacks.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
DISCOURSE: 1492
THE NEW WINE AND OLD BOTTLES
Luk 5:36-38. And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
THE cavils of objectors have been frequently overruled for the benefit of the church. They have given rise to many of our Lords most instructive discourses, and thereby furnished us with a much clearer and more extensive knowledge of our duty. Thrice in this chapter do we see our Lord called upon to answer the objections that were either secretly entertained, or openly expressed, against him. His forgiving of sins, and associating with sinners, had given offence; but he vindicated his conduct with respect to both, and has afforded us herein a rich discovery of his power and grace. In the context he was condemned for leaving his Disciples so much at liberty respecting the duty of fasting. In reply to the queries put to him on this subject, he delivered the parables which we have now read: and in which are contained,
I.
A virtual acknowledgment of the duty of fasting
[This duty, together with the attendant offices of humiliation and prayer, our Lord had forborne to insist upon so much as John had done: and for that he was blamed by the self-righteous Pharisees. But in his answer to the question put to him, he does not say, that the children of the bride-chamber were never to fast, but only not during the present season, whilst the Bridegroom was yet with them. Nor in the parables before us does he say, that the old garment should not be mended, nor the wine put into vessels at all, but only that discretion was to be exercised with respect to the manner of doing these things. These intimations alone were sufficient to establish the propriety of practising the duty there spoken of: but they are enforced by many other passages of Holy Writ; and especially by the admonitions given by our Lord himself respecting our conduct when we fast [Note: Mat 6:16-18.]. Indeed, in our text itself he says, that after his removal from them they should fast [Note: ver. 35.].]
There being no doubt amongst us on this point, I proceed more particularly to notice that which is in fact the substance of both the parables, namely,
II.
A special direction for the performance of this duty
In inculcating or practising this solemn duty, we are here taught to pay the strictest attention to the principal circumstances relating to it, such as the time, the manner, the end.
1.
The time
[It is not every season that is suited to this duty. At a wedding-feast, for instance, it would be absurd to fast. But on occasion of any great calamity, whether public or private, a fit opportunity would offer itself. In a season of war, famine, pestilence, the deepest humiliation becomes us. So under the pressure of any personal affliction, and especially in a time of spiritual distress, when corruptions are strong, and temptations powerful, and self-reproach is deep, and God has hidden his face from us, it becomes us to betake ourselves to fasting and prayer. Respecting an unclean devil, which the Disciples were not able to eject, our Lord said, This kind goeth not out but by fasting and prayer [Note: Mat 17:21.]. And so we find on many occasions our lusts too strong for us; and therefore too strong, because we use not these means of obtaining the victory over them. There are also in domestic life seasons when husband and wife may profitably separate from each other for a short time in order to address themselves more effectually to the discharge of this high duty of fasting and prayer [Note: 1Co 5:7.]. And thus has Solomon informed us; There is a time to weep, as well as a time to laugh, and a time to mourn as well as a time to dance [Note: Ecc 3:4.]: and these seasons we ought more particularly to select, even when the Bridegroom is taken away from us.]
2.
The manner
[Here also discretion is greatly wanted. To carry our austerities so far as to injure our own health, is highly inexpedient. Such conduct, instead of fitting us the more for the Lords service, would rather incapacitate us for it, and defeat the very object we had in view. The putting of new wine into leathern bottles that were weakened by use and age, would lead to the destruction of the bottles themselves, and of the wine committed to them. And so would indiscreet austerities operate on us, and on all around us. For, what would the world at large think of a religion that prescribed such things? Would they not cry out against it as a gloomy superstition? And what would an inquiring soul be ready to feel? Would he not be discouraged and disheartened, and, through a distaste for such self-tormenting exercises, be ready to relinquish it altogether? We must take care then, that in our mode of inculcating these self-denying duties, we do not give occasion for such unfounded sentiments, and such erroneous conceptions.]
3.
The end
[The Pharisees put these services in the place of true religion, not knowing that they are only as means to an end, and as the scaffolding to the edifice which it is employed to construct. Hence arose their bitter complaint against our Lord. But we must ever remember, that, to whatever extent we multiplied these services, they never could stand in the place of repentance, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the great error of the Church of Rome: they place penance, that is, a round of observances prescribed by man, in the place of repentance as enjoined by God, and in the place also of the Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood alone can cleanse from all sin. But I charge you before God to be on your guard against this, since it will make void the whole Gospel of Christ, and cause the blood of Christ to have been shed in vain. As a discipline for the mortifying of the flesh and the quickening of the spirit, fasting is good: but as a substitute for an entire renovation of soul, and for a simple faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, it is a broken reed, which will pierce even unto death the hand that rests upon it.]
Learn then from this parable,
1.
To judge with candour
[The Pharisees through their pride and ignorance were led to condemn our Lord. And thus we also are apt to judge our unoffending brethren. We have a standard of our own; and by that we try all other persons: and, if they exceed that standard we condemn them as enthusiasts; or, if they fall short of it, we account them but lukewarm formalists. But the same standard cannot be applied to all. There are ten thousand circumstances which may not only justify a difference of conduct in pious persons, but may actually produce it. The Disciples of John, we readily acknowledge, did right in fasting oft: but did the Disciples of our Lord act wrong because they did not fast at all? No: the circumstances of the two parties were widely different, as our Lord informed them; and therefore both were right. So it may be with many of our brethren, who differ from us in relation to this matter: and it does not become us to judge them. To their own Master they stand or fall: and it is our part to commit them altogether unto God, who judgeth righteously, and who alone can estimate every thing which is to be taken into the account.]
2.
To give advice with caution
[We ought to bear in mind the different situations and capacities of men, and not to be requiring of novices what is suited only to the strength of an established saint. Our blessed Lord spake not all he knew, but only what his hearers were able to receive; and even from his own Disciples he kept back much which they were not able at that time to comprehend [Note: Joh 16:12.]. So St. Paul fed his Corinthian converts with milk and not with meat, because they were yet in too carnal a state to enter into the deeper subjects which he would gladly have brought before them [Note: 1Co 3:2.]. Thus then should we also do. We should feed babes with milk, and minister meat to those only who by reason of a more adult age are able to digest it [Note: Heb 5:12-14.]. Nor let any one think this unbecoming a minister of God. It is the true and proper office of love. Jacob would not drive his lambs too far, lest in one day he should kill them all [Note: Gen 33:13.]. And our blessed Lord carried the lambs in his bosom, and gently led those that were with young. And thus must we also exercise the same tender care in administering to the lambs of our flock, lest by undue rigour we break the bruised reed, or by overwhelming exactions we quench the smoking flax.]
3.
To press forward with holy unremitting diligence
[It was of his holy Apostles that our Lord said, that in the days after his removal from them they should fast. Who then are we that we should think ourselves at liberty to remit our exertions in our heavenly course? Never will there be in this life a moment when our vigilance can be dispensed with, or our most self-denying labours be relaxed. Nor, if St. Paul was in fastings often, should we account that holy discipline unnecessary for us. On the contrary, we should by all possible means keep our body under and bring it into subjection, lest by any means, after having ministered to others, we ourselves should be deemed unworthy the approbation of our God [Note: 1Co 9:27.].]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
36. ] The latter part of this verse is peculiar, and is to be thus understood: ‘ if he does, he both will rend the new garment ’ (by taking out of it the ), ‘ and the piece from the new garment will not agree with the old .’ The common interpretation (which makes the nom. to , and understands as its accus.) is inconsistent with the construction, in which is to be coupled with , not with . In Matt. and Mark the mischief done is differently expressed. Our text is very significant, and represents to us the spoiling of both systems by an attempt to engraft the new upon the old: the new loses its completeness; the old , its consistency.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Luk 5:36-39 . Relative parabolic Logia . : an editorial introduction to the parabolic sayings. The first of these, as given by Lk., varies in form from the version in the parallels, suggests somewhat different ideas, and is in itself by no means clear. Much depends on whether we omit or retain in the first clause. If, with [52] [53] [54] [55] , we retain it, the case put is: a piece cut out of a new garment to patch an old one, the evil results being: the new spoiled, and the old patched with the new piece presenting an incongruous appearance ( ). If, with [56] [57] , etc., we omit , the case put may be: a new piece not cut out of a new garment, but a remnant (Hahn) used to patch an old, this new piece making a rent in the old garment; in second clause not object of, but nominative to, , and the contrast between the new patch and old garment presenting a grotesque appearance. The objection to this latter view is that there is no reason in the case supposed why the new patch should make a rent. In Mt. and Mk. the patch is made with unfulled cloth, which will contract. But the remnant of cloth with which a new garment is made would not be unfulled, and it would not contract. The sole evil in that case would be a piebald appearance. On the whole it seems best to retain , and to render , he (the man who does so foolish a thing) will rend the new. Kypke suggests as an alternative rendering: the new is rent, taking intransitively, of which use he cites an instance from the Testament of the twelve patriarchs. The sense on this rendering remains the same.
[52] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[53] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[54] Codex Bezae
[55] Codex Regius–eighth century, represents an ancient text, and is often in agreement with and B.
[56] Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century, a chief representative of the “Syrian” text, that is, the revised text formed by judicious eclectic use of all existing texts, and meant to be the authoritative New Testament.
[57] Codex Ephraemi
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
36.] The latter part of this verse is peculiar, and is to be thus understood: if he does, he both will rend the new garment (by taking out of it the ), and the piece from the new garment will not agree with the old. The common interpretation (which makes the nom. to , and understands as its accus.) is inconsistent with the construction, in which is to be coupled with , not with . In Matt. and Mark the mischief done is differently expressed. Our text is very significant, and represents to us the spoiling of both systems by an attempt to engraft the new upon the old:-the new loses its completeness; the old, its consistency.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 5:36. , a parable) From a garment, and from wine: a kind of parable especially appropriate at a banquet [Luk 5:29]: comp. ch. Luk 14:7.- ) new.[57]
[57] In the sense, not worn out by use, different from the old worn-out garments: but applied to the wine, new, in the sense of fresh, recent, opposed to wine mellowed by age; is lately originated, as opposed to that originated some time back; , not yet used, new, and different, as opposed to that which was formerly: hence Jesus does not say , nor , nor , but , , and . See Tittm. Syn.-ED. and TRANSL.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
No man: Mat 9:16, Mat 9:17, Mar 2:21, Mar 2:22
agreeth: Lev 19:19, Deu 22:11, 2Co 6:16
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
8
This paragraph is explained by the comments on Mat 9:16-17.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Luk 5:36. Else he will rend the new, and also, etc. This part of the verse differs from the parallel passages, in representing a double disadvantage. In Matthew and Mark the mischief done is differently expressed. Our text is very significant, and represents to us the spoiling of born systems by the attempt to engraft the new upon the old: the new loses its completeness; the old, its consistency. Alford.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vers. 36-39. Here we have the second part of the conversation. The expression , and He said also, indicates its range. This expression, which occurs so frequently in Luke, always indicates the point at which Jesus, after having treated of the particular subject before Him, rises to a more general view which commands the whole question. Thus, from this moment He makes the particular difference respecting fasting subordinate to the general opposition between the old and new order of things,an idea which carries Him back to the occasion of the scene, the call of a publican.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Verse 36
The new cloth referred to was such as would shrink and draw the edges of the old material, so as very soon to produce a worse rent than it was intended to repair.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Jesus next illustrated with parables the fact that His coming introduced a radical break with former religious customs. He did not come to patch Judaism up but to inaugurate a new order. Had Israel accepted Jesus this new order would have been the messianic kingdom, but since the Jews rejected Him it became the church. Eventually it will become the messianic kingdom. Simply adding His new order to Judaism would have two detrimental effects. It would damage the new order, and it would not preserve the old order. It would also appear incongruous. Only Luke’s account includes the first effect, that it would damage the new order. Luke evidently included this to help his Christian readers see that Israel and the church are distinct.
"The real point is the incompatibility of the two pieces of cloth, and the contrast of new and old is implicit. . . . Whereas in Mk. the deficiencies of Judaism cannot be mended simply by a Christian ’patch’, in Lk. the emphasis is on the impossibility of trying to graft something Christian onto Judaism." [Note: Marshall, The Gospel . . ., p. 227.]